She started by making a familiar conservative point about the so-called “fiscal cliff”– that the White House talks about ending tax cuts for the wealthy, but will not talk about spending cuts:

And the fact is that I find it extraordinary that we are zeroing in on this discussion only about taxes, and we do not have this kind of elaborate discussion when it comes to spending cuts. Two points here. Number one, Americans realized that the three biggest drivers of our debt are Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. We need structural change. We haven’t heard that.

Let’s step in here for a second: When did Americans “realize” any of this? When they’re asked, thev tend to oppose cuts to these programs by substantial margins. There was an election last month; surely voters could have sent a message about their desire to cut these programs.

She went on:

Number two, on taxes, you really can’t put all of the taxes into one category. Dividend taxes, for one, is probably the biggest threat to the markets and the economy right now, when you’re just looking at taxes. And dividend taxes are not a rich tax, nor are capital gains. You’re talking about pension funds, 401(k) plans, investments in companies that pay dividends. If you’re expecting a dividend tax to go from 15 percent to 44 percent, that completely removes the opportunity or the incentive to buy dividend-paying companies. And that’s going to hurt not just the rich. That’s going to hurt everybody if, in fact, we were to see that. That’s very dangerous, and it is going to create a massive selloff.

For starters, income from 401(k) retirement accounts is taxed as normal income when funds are withdrawn from those accounts, so it is hard to see how that would be relevant. It has been, however, a popular media talking point in discussions like this–like when then-CNBC host Erin Burnett declared that a capital gains rate cut meant that “the half of Americans that own stocks get a benefit there as well.”)

The truth is that tax breaks on dividends and capital gains are most certainly a “rich tax.” This chart from the Citizens for Tax Justice shows that the overwhelming share of these tax breaks goes to the top 1 percent:

The attempt to portray tax hikes on the wealthy as something else is mostly a misdirection; as the New York Times reported today (12/3/12):

Many economists agree than an increasing proportion of the entire equities market is now held by retirement investors whose holdings are not subject to current tax law; by foreign investors who don’t pay American taxes, or by institutional investors like insurance companies and pension funds that are exempt from taxes.

Or, to put it another way: According to the Congressional Research Service, the most significant contributor to the growth in inequality from 1996 to 2006 was dividends and capital gains. That income has enjoyed a massive break over the past dozen years.

If it’s important to have an “economic roundtable,” then Meet the Press should book a guest who might challenge these very familiar, very misleading talking points–or find a host who can do the same.

Activism Director and and Co-producer of CounterSpinPeter Hart is the activism director at FAIR. He writes for FAIR's magazine Extra! and is also a co-host and producer of FAIR's syndicated radio show CounterSpin. He is the author of The Oh Really? Factor: Unspinning Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly (Seven Stories Press, 2003). Hart has been interviewed by a number of media outlets, including NBC Nightly News, Fox News Channel's O'Reilly Factor, the Los Angeles Times, Newsday and the Associated Press. He has also appeared on Showtime and in the movie Outfoxed. Follow Peter on Twitter at @peterfhart.

No Diff.First Im doing fine because I worked my ass off my whole life,and still do.As far as your idea of wealth sharing, how in the hell is that fair?I work my whole life in school and jobs for a dream.Go to med school.Make little till Im in my thirties .By that time I have a massive bill to pay back.Now I hit my fifties, and am starting to see payback,though I work 14 hour days ,on call round the clock,six days a week with massive responsibility.Insurance premiums ect.Now who is it you want me to share my money with in a fair share?The guy who cleans my windows?The girl who cleans my office?My nurse who is 24 just out of school?All those years I had friends in the un ions.Making buku bucks.Vacations.Hell some are ready to retire and Im just getting started.I will work till i die.Do they owe me for all their fun years while I struggled?I will get the bill ready.In Hollywood you hear this claptrap.Yet I dont ever see Brad pitt dividing his 30 million with the grips or the make up people.in your case I guess you want the government to do that.I will not give you a sillillique on capitalism.Waste of time Im sure.Just know this.I don’t owe you anything.I do my job.Take care of my family.Give to charity.I pay my taxes.Yet I am target number one to a government who can’t manage OTHER people money well and now needs more .Always more.You on the left ride on with your banner held high that reads “WE GOT WHAT IT TAKES, TO TAKE WHAT YOU GOT.”Then you flush it down a rat hole.

Not sure what Brad Pitt or Hollywood really has to do with this conversation. I am also in my fifties. I worked like a dog for more than 20 years in I.T. and got paid fairly well through most of it. That all went down the drain when the US began importing I.T. workers in the late 90’s (under Clinton, a “D”) and early 2000’s (under W., an “R”), at a time when the I.T. job market was already flooded with inept wannabes who had been scooped up right off the sidewalk, many of whom I was forced to work with. Go along to get along, regardless of how cruel or incompetent they were.

For 10 years, I have tried to go to school, with no help from government because it was so busy slashing programs that would have helped me. I have taken all kinds of jobs, some of them quite horrid pay-wise and personnel-wise. But I did take them and worked, and struggled to survive amidst harassment, unfair terminations, and funding cuts. The “system” never gave me credit for my hard, physical labor.

I have in my possession, somewhere in the piles of long-sealed cartons stored by various friends and former roommates over the past decade, an BA in Computer Science, a paper worth almost as little now as it did when I got it. Back then, it was unnecessary as anyone could work in the field. Today, my experience usually counts more, if employers would just consider it. But, you see, dear michael e, the employers want I.T. workers who have been employed. So I am doubly-blessed with this curse of unemployment.

Brad Pitt might look selfish to you, but the system does not force him to pay a penny more than he might care to, whether that be his taxes or stuffing a few C-note in the pockets of the grips and crew. Also, michael e, I get that maybe you are not making what Brad Pitt is making — am I right? You sound like a working stiff with a family to care for.

The tax “increase” would probably not affect you much, if at all. Everyone agrees that people making under about $250,000 would not experience much of a hike at all. Those people are not considered “rich.” If you happen to be making more than $250,000 a year, you can afford to pay more in taxes. It will not have much of an impact on your income at all. But people making billions, mainly in UNEARNED income (i.e., money extorted from the physical labor of people who actually do EARN it), will pay more, and probably a lot more.

I can’t cry too much or too long for those wealthy tax dodgers who live in castles, eat well, enjoy numerous vacations a year, whose dogs are healthier than some American children, when their taxes go back to what they were before Ronald Reagan was in office. They will still be able to afford everything they have now, even as the rest of us continue to live modestly and struggle along on low incomes.

Don’t weep for those people. I am certain you are working harder than they are!